StockData

China Automotive Systems vs Stoneridge

CAAS and SRI side by side, both in motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.

How CAAS and SRI compare

Stoneridge grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (37.8% versus 17.6% for China Automotive Systems).

China Automotive Systems keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 5.6% compared with −14.6% at Stoneridge.

China Automotive Systems scores higher on the StockData Score (12 against 5 for Stoneridge), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.

Key numbers

A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.

MetricCAASSRI
Size and price
Market cap–$145M
Share price$4.41$5.10
Change, 1 year4.8%−14.9%
Change, 5 years14.2%−77.3%
Beta (5Y)0.841.35
Employees4,8124,200
StockData Score
Total score12 (better)5
Valuation score03 (better)
Growth score4 (better)2
Performance score4 (better)0
Health score4 (better)0
Dividend score00
Valuation
P/S–0.2×
P/B–1.2×
FCF yield–−0.06%
Fair value–$12.31
Margin of safety–58.6%
Growth
Revenue growth (TTM)17.6%37.8% (better)
Revenue growth, 5Y average12.9% (better)5.9%
Net income growth (TTM)42.9%–
EPS growth (TTM)43.4%–
Profitability
Gross margin19.0% (better)16.5%
Operating margin7.0% (better)−6.9%
Net margin5.6% (better)−14.6%
FCF margin9.7% (better)−0.01%
Return on equity11.4% (better)−70.8%
Return on invested capital13.5% (better)−24.6%
Financial health
Debt / equity0.20 (better)1.16
Net debt / EBITDA−1.42–
Interest coverage31.5×–
Current ratio1.36 (better)0.96
Altman Z-score–1.64
Piotroski F-score9 (better)3
Dividends and buybacks
Payout ratio5.1%–
Shareholder yield–0.00%
Ownership
Held by institutions–81.0%
Held by insiders64.8%12.9%
Insider net buying, 12 months–$85.7K
Short interest, % of float0.30%3.1%

Go deeper

For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.